Tuesday, 27 November 2012

A central issue in The AWU Scandal is that Gillard knew the slush fund was a slush fund, not a workplace reform entity

In this extract from Pravda's midday news, see if you can notice the ABC's careful replacement of the phrase "the PM knew it was a slush fund" with the new and improved position "the PM did not know it was a slush fund".

Compare and contrast the post-modern, non-misogynist Macquarie dictionary approved "did not know it was a slush fund" with the older model statements of the pre-Sussex-Street-Finishing-School-for-Gals version of events described by Miss Gillard at her record of interview at Jointly and Severally lawyers.

Note also the youthful, trustworthy depiction of the new and 7.30 approved Bruce Wilson, compared and contrasted with the latter day hench-man Blewitt.

JULIA GILLARD 11 September 1995:

"It's, it's common practice, indeed every union has what it refers to as a re-election fund, slush fund, whatever, which is the funds that the leadership team, into which the leadership team puts money so that they can finance their next election campaign. It is not proper to use union resources for election campaigns so you need to finance them yourself. Some of them, you know, they can cost $10,000, $20,000 -- they're not cheap. So the usual mechanism people use to amass that amount of money is that they require the officials who ran on their ticket to enter payroll deduction schemes where money each week or fortnight goes from their pay into a bank account which is used for re-election purposes from time to time. They also have different fundraisers, dinners and raffles and so on to amass the necessary amount of money to mount their re-election campaign.

(Several lines redacted.)

The thinking behind the forming of incorporated associations is that it had been our experience that if you did it in a less formal way, you just had someone, say Fred Bloggs, say, oh look, I'll just open a bank account and everybody can put the money into there, the problem developed that when the leadership team fractured, as relatively commonly happens, you got into a very difficult dispute about who was the owner of the monies in the bank account, so it was better to have an incorporated association, a legal entity, into which people could participate as members, that was the holder of the account."

Comments

A central issue in The AWU Scandal is that Gillard knew the slush fund was a slush fund, not a workplace reform entity

In this extract from Pravda's midday news, see if you can notice the ABC's careful replacement of the phrase "the PM knew it was a slush fund" with the new and improved position "the PM did not know it was a slush fund".

Compare and contrast the post-modern, non-misogynist Macquarie dictionary approved "did not know it was a slush fund" with the older model statements of the pre-Sussex-Street-Finishing-School-for-Gals version of events described by Miss Gillard at her record of interview at Jointly and Severally lawyers.

Note also the youthful, trustworthy depiction of the new and 7.30 approved Bruce Wilson, compared and contrasted with the latter day hench-man Blewitt.

JULIA GILLARD 11 September 1995:

"It's, it's common practice, indeed every union has what it refers to as a re-election fund, slush fund, whatever, which is the funds that the leadership team, into which the leadership team puts money so that they can finance their next election campaign. It is not proper to use union resources for election campaigns so you need to finance them yourself. Some of them, you know, they can cost $10,000, $20,000 -- they're not cheap. So the usual mechanism people use to amass that amount of money is that they require the officials who ran on their ticket to enter payroll deduction schemes where money each week or fortnight goes from their pay into a bank account which is used for re-election purposes from time to time. They also have different fundraisers, dinners and raffles and so on to amass the necessary amount of money to mount their re-election campaign.

(Several lines redacted.)

The thinking behind the forming of incorporated associations is that it had been our experience that if you did it in a less formal way, you just had someone, say Fred Bloggs, say, oh look, I'll just open a bank account and everybody can put the money into there, the problem developed that when the leadership team fractured, as relatively commonly happens, you got into a very difficult dispute about who was the owner of the monies in the bank account, so it was better to have an incorporated association, a legal entity, into which people could participate as members, that was the holder of the account."